Final Recommendations on the Future Electoral Arrangements for Richmondshire in North Yorkshire
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE FUTURE ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR RICHMONDSHIRE IN NORTH YORKSHIRE Report to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions November 1999 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND This report sets out the Commission’s final recommendations on the electoral arrangements for the district of Richmondshire in North Yorkshire. Members of the Commission are: Professor Malcolm Grant (Chairman) Professor Michael Clarke (Deputy Chairman) Peter Brokenshire Kru Desai Pamela Gordon Robin Gray Robert Hughes CBE Barbara Stephens (Chief Executive) ©Crown Copyright 1999 Applications for reproduction should be made to: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Copyright Unit. The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by The Local Government Commission for England with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, ©Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Licence Number: GD 03114G. This report is printed on recycled paper. ii LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND CONTENTS page LETTER TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE v SUMMARY vii 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 CURRENT ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS 3 3 DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS 7 4 RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION 9 5 ANALYSIS AND FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS 11 6 NEXT STEPS 31 APPENDIX A Final Recommendations for Richmondshire: Detailed Mapping 33 B Draft Recommendations for Richmondshire (May 1999) 37 A large map illustrating the proposed ward boundaries for Richmond is inserted inside the back cover of the report. LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND iii iv LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND Local Government Commission for England 30 November 1999 Dear Secretary of State On 3 November 1998 the Commission began a periodic electoral review of Richmondshire under the Local Government Act 1992. We published our draft recommendations in May 1999 and undertook an eight-week period of consultation. We have now prepared our final recommendations in the light of the consultation. We have substantially confirmed our draft recommendations, although a modification has been made (see paragraphs 139-140) in the light of further evidence. This report sets out our final recommendations for changes to electoral arrangements in Richmondshire. We recommend that Richmondshire District Council should be served by 34 councillors representing 24 wards, and that changes should be made to ward boundaries in order to improve electoral equality, having regard to the statutory criteria. We recommend that the whole Council should continue to be elected together. We note that you have now set out in the White Paper, Modern Local Government – In Touch with the People (Cm 4014, HMSO), legislative proposals for a number of changes to local authority electoral arrangements. However, until such time as that new legislation is in place we are obliged to conduct our work in accordance with current legislation, and to continue our current approach to periodic electoral reviews. I would like to thank members and officers of the District Council and other local people who have contributed to the review. Their co-operation and assistance have been very much appreciated by Commissioners and staff. Yours sincerely PROFESSOR MALCOLM GRANT Chairman LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND v vi LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND SUMMARY The Commission began a review of Richmondshire These recommendations seek to ensure that the on 3 November 1998. We published our draft number of electors represented by each district recommendations for electoral arrangements on 25 councillor is as nearly as possible the same, having May 1999, after which we undertook an eight- regard to local circumstances. week period of consultation. ● In eight of the proposed 24 wards the ● This report summarises the representations number of electors per councillor would we received during consultation on our draft vary by more than 10 per cent from the recommendations, and offers our final district average initially. recommendations to the Secretary of State. ● Electoral equality is forecast to improve further, with the number of electors per We found that the existing electoral arrangements councillor in all but one ward expected to provide unequal representation of electors in vary by less than 10 per cent from the Richmondshire because: average for the district in 2003. Colburn ward would vary by 11 per cent. ● in 16 of the 26 wards the number of electors represented by each councillor varies by Recommendations are also made for changes to more than 10 per cent from the average for parish and town council electoral arrangements the district and 10 wards vary by more than which provide for: 20 per cent from the average; ● by 2003 electoral equality is not expected to ● revised warding arrangements and the improve, with the number of electors per redistribution of councillors for the parishes councillor forecast to vary by more than 10 of Hunton and Richmond. per cent from the average in 17 wards, and by more than 20 per cent in 11 wards. All further correspondence on these Our main final recommendations for future recommendations and the matters discussed electoral arrangements (Figures 1 and 2 and in this report should be addressed to the paragraphs 139-140) are that: Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, who will not make ● Richmondshire District Council should have an order implementing the Commission’s 34 councillors, the same as at present; recommendations before 11 January 2000: ● there should be 24 wards, instead of the The Secretary of State current 26; Department of the Environment, ● the boundaries of 24 of the existing wards Transport and the Regions should be modified, resulting in a net Local Government Sponsorship Division reduction of two, and two wards should Eland House retain their existing boundaries; Bressenden Place ● elections should continue to take place for London SW1E 5DU the whole council every four years. LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND vii Figure 1: The Commission’s Final Recommendations: Summary Ward name Number of Constituent areas Map reference councillors 1 Addlebrough 1 Askrigg ward (the parishes of Askrigg, Map 2 Bainbridge and Low Abbotside); Aysgarth ward (part – the parishes of Aysgarth and Thornton Rust) 2 Barton 1 Barton ward (part – the parishes of Barton, Map 2 Cleasby, Newton Morrell and Stapleton) 3 Bolton Castle 1 Bolton Manor ward (part – the parishes Map 2 of Castle Bolton with East & West Bolton, Preston-under-Scar, Redmire and Wensley); Aysgarth ward (part – Carperby-cum- Thoresby parish); Leyburn ward (part – Bellerby parish) 4 Brompton-on-Swale 2 Swaleside ward (part – the parishes of Map 2 & Scorton Brompton-on-Swale and Easby); Scorton ward (the parishes of Bolton-on-Swale, Ellerton-on-Swale, Scorton and Uckerby) 5 Catterick 2 Catterick with Tunstall ward (part – Map 2 Catterick parish) 6 Colburn 3 Unchanged (Colburn parish) Map 2 7 Croft 1 Croft on Tees ward (the parishes of Map 2 Croft-on-Tees, Dalton-on-Tees and Eryholme); St Michael with St Luke ward (part – North Cowton parish) 8 Gilling West 1 St Agathas ward (part – the parishes of Map 2 Aske and Gilling with Hartforth & Sedbury); Kirby Hill ward (part – the parishes of Gayles, Kirby Hill, Ravensworth and Whashton) 9 Hawes & 1 Unchanged (the parishes of Hawes and Map 2 High Abbotside High Abbotside) 10 Hipswell 2 Hipswell ward (Hipswell parish); Map 2 Swaleside ward (part – St Martin’s parish) 11 Hornby Castle 1 Lower Dale ward (part – Arrathorne and Maps 2 and A2 Hornby parishes, and part of Hunton parish); Catterick with Tunstall ward (part – the parishes of Appleton East & West, Brough with St Giles and Tunstall) 12 Leyburn 2 Leyburn ward (part – Leyburn parish); Map 2 Urevale ward (part – Harmby parish) viii LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND Figure 1 (continued): The Commission’s Final Recommendations: Summary Ward name Number of Constituent areas Map reference councillors 13 Lower Wensleydale 1 Urevale ward (part – the parishes of Akebar, Map 2 Barden, Constable Burton, East Hauxwell, Finghall, Garriston, Hutton Hang, Spennithorne, Thornton Steward and West Hauxwell); Lower Dale ward (part – Patrick Brompton and Newton-le-Willows parishes) 14 Melsonby 1 Barton ward (part – Manfield and Cliffe Map 2 parishes); Stanwick ward (part – Aldbrough and Melsonby parishes) 15 Middleham 1 Middleham & Coverdale ward (part – the Map 2 parishes of Calderbergh with East Scrafton, Coverham with Agglethorpe, East Witton Out, East Witton Town, Melmerby, Middleham and West Scrafton) 16 Middleton Tyas 1 St Michael with St Luke ward (part – the Map 2 parishes of Middleton Tyas and Moulton); St Agathas ward (part – Skeeby parish) 17 Newsham with 1 Kirby Hill (part – the parishes of Caldwell, Map 2 Eppleby Dalton, East Layton, Forcett & Carkin, Newsham and West Layton); Stanwick ward (part – Eppleby and Stanwick St John parishes) 18 Penhill 1 Aysgarth ward (part – the parishes of Map 2 Bishopdale, Burton cum Walden, Newbiggin and Thoralby); Middleham & Coverdale ward (part – Carlton Highdale and Carlton Town parishes); Bolton Manor ward (part - West Witton parish) 19 Reeth & 1 Reeth ward (part – the parishes of Map 2 Arkengarthdale Arkengarthdale, Marrick and Reeth, Fremington & Healaugh); Lower Swaledale ward (part – the parishes of Marske and New Forest) 20 Richmond Central 2 Richmond Central ward (part); Richmond Map